International Law in Times of Hegemony: Unequal Power and the Shaping of the International Legal Order
International Law in Times of Hegemony: Unequal Power and the Shaping of the International Legal Order
复制标题
霸权时代的国际法：权力不平等与国际法律秩序的塑造
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2005
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Nico Krisch
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Nico Krisch
霸权和国际法常常被认为是不可调和的：人们普遍认为国际法取决于力量平衡，霸权者倾向于政治工具而回避国际法。这与国际法和国际政治之间往往理想化的对比相对应，一个反映理性和正义，另一个反映野蛮的力量。现实主义者和持批判态度的法律的学者长期以来一直试图反对这种理想化，但往往只是将国际法降格为权力。本文试图超越这些立场，通过分析占主导地位的国家与国际法互动的多种方式。它借鉴国际关系理论，建立了这种互动的模型，并以主要来自西班牙、英国和美国主导阶段的历史例子加以说明。所观察到的典型模式是工具化和退出，同时试图以更有等级的方式重新塑造国际法，并以更能适应正式等级的国内法律的工具取而代之。由此产生的图景应该为批评提供一个起点，并帮助我们更好地理解为什么国际法同时对追求权力具有工具性和抵制性。国际法对于强国来说是重要的合法性来源，但为了提供合法性，它需要与权力保持距离，并且必须抵制将其简单地转化为法律。因此，国际法在强国的要求和国际社会的正义理想之间始终处于不稳定但最终是稳固的地位。
Hegemony and international law are often regarded as irreconcilable: international law is widely assumed to depend on a balance of power and to be eschewed by hegemons in favour of political tools. This corresponds to an often idealized contrast between international law and international politics, one reflecting reason and justice, the other brute power. Realists and critical legal scholars have long sought to counter this idealization, but often by merely reducing international law to power. This article seeks to go beyond these positions by analysing the multiple ways in which dominant states interact with international law. Drawing on international relations theory, it develops a model of this interaction and illustrates it with historical examples, taken mainly from Spanish, British and American phases of dominance. The typical pattern observed is one of instrumentalization and withdrawal, coupled with attempts at reshaping international law in a more hierarchical way and at replacing it with domestic legal tools that better accommodate formal hierarchies. The resulting picture should provide a starting point for critique and help us better understand why international law is simultaneously instrumental and resistant to the pursuit of power. International law is important for powerful states as a source of legitimacy, but in order to provide legitimacy, it needs to distance itself from power and has to resist its mere translation into law. International law then occupies an always precarious, but eventually secure position between the demands of the powerful and the ideals of justice held in international society.